Evaluation of 3 Point-of-Care Testing Hematology Analyzers for White Blood Count

N. Brouwer, M. Chevallier, Willem Wilbie, M. Schoorl, J. van Pelt
{"title":"Evaluation of 3 Point-of-Care Testing Hematology Analyzers for White Blood Count","authors":"N. Brouwer, M. Chevallier, Willem Wilbie, M. Schoorl, J. van Pelt","doi":"10.1097/POC.0000000000000139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the past few years, several small hematology analyzers were introduced for point-of-care testing (POCT) purposes. The POCT hematology analyzers can be used for the same purposes as centralized systems, but the possibility to use capillary blood from a fingerprick is a major advantage in several situations. The 3 tested POCT systems were the WBC DIFF system of Hemocue (Sweden), the Microsemi C-reactive protein of Horiba (Japan), and the Norma Icon hematology analyzer (Austria). The Microsemi and WBC DIFF were evaluated simultaneously. For the agreement with the laboratory method, 125 patient samples (EDTA blood, patients from general practitioners) were compared with the Sysmex XE-2100. For the agreement of the Norma Icon with the laboratory method, 188 patient samples (EDTA blood, 90 clinical and 98 polyclinic patients) were compared with the Sysmex XN-9000. The intra-assay coefficients of variation of the various samples (low, medium, high) are in all systems better than stated by the manufacturer [white blood cell (WBC), 3%; or fractions, 5%] except for monocytes, which were approximately 25%. Ordinary linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman difference analysis showed good results for the WBC and granulocyte or neutrophil comparisons. Lymphocyte comparisons showed less favorable results in the Bland-Altman analyses. In the case of the monocytes, the correlation coefficients were inadequate for linear regression. All 3 POCT hematology analyzers seemed to be suitable for WBC measurements and differential analyses of lymphocytes and granulocytes or neutrophils in venous blood, but evaluations with capillary fingerprick blood will be necessary.","PeriodicalId":20262,"journal":{"name":"Point of Care: The Journal of Near-Patient Testing & Technology","volume":"17 13 1","pages":"105–107"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Point of Care: The Journal of Near-Patient Testing & Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/POC.0000000000000139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract In the past few years, several small hematology analyzers were introduced for point-of-care testing (POCT) purposes. The POCT hematology analyzers can be used for the same purposes as centralized systems, but the possibility to use capillary blood from a fingerprick is a major advantage in several situations. The 3 tested POCT systems were the WBC DIFF system of Hemocue (Sweden), the Microsemi C-reactive protein of Horiba (Japan), and the Norma Icon hematology analyzer (Austria). The Microsemi and WBC DIFF were evaluated simultaneously. For the agreement with the laboratory method, 125 patient samples (EDTA blood, patients from general practitioners) were compared with the Sysmex XE-2100. For the agreement of the Norma Icon with the laboratory method, 188 patient samples (EDTA blood, 90 clinical and 98 polyclinic patients) were compared with the Sysmex XN-9000. The intra-assay coefficients of variation of the various samples (low, medium, high) are in all systems better than stated by the manufacturer [white blood cell (WBC), 3%; or fractions, 5%] except for monocytes, which were approximately 25%. Ordinary linear regression analysis and Bland-Altman difference analysis showed good results for the WBC and granulocyte or neutrophil comparisons. Lymphocyte comparisons showed less favorable results in the Bland-Altman analyses. In the case of the monocytes, the correlation coefficients were inadequate for linear regression. All 3 POCT hematology analyzers seemed to be suitable for WBC measurements and differential analyses of lymphocytes and granulocytes or neutrophils in venous blood, but evaluations with capillary fingerprick blood will be necessary.
3种即时检测血液分析仪对白细胞计数的评价
在过去的几年里,一些小型血液分析仪被引入到护理点检测(POCT)的目的。POCT血液学分析仪可用于与集中式系统相同的目的,但在几种情况下,使用手指刺破的毛细血管血液的可能性是一个主要优势。测试的3种POCT系统分别是瑞典Hemocue公司的WBC DIFF系统、日本Horiba公司的Microsemi c反应蛋白系统和奥地利Norma Icon血液学分析仪。同时测定Microsemi和WBC DIFF。为了与实验室方法一致,125例患者样本(EDTA血液,来自全科医生的患者)与Sysmex XE-2100进行了比较。为了与实验室方法的一致性,188例患者样本(EDTA血液,90例临床患者和98例综合诊所患者)与Sysmex XN-9000进行了比较。各种样品的测定内变异系数(低、中、高)在所有系统中都优于制造商所声明的[白细胞(WBC), 3%;或分数,5%],除了单核细胞,约占25%。普通线性回归分析和Bland-Altman差异分析显示白细胞与粒细胞或中性粒细胞比较结果良好。淋巴细胞比较在Bland-Altman分析中显示不太有利的结果。在单核细胞的情况下,相关系数不足以进行线性回归。所有3种POCT血液学分析仪似乎都适用于白细胞的测量和静脉血中淋巴细胞、粒细胞或中性粒细胞的差异分析,但用毛细血管刺血进行评估是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信